Editorial management

Review process of the articles

Because it is a publication with arbitration, the Journal receives, reviews and sends the papers to the opinion of the Editorial Committee, which selects the articles that meet the requirements and assign internal and external peer reviewers to the publishing institution, for double-blind review, on whose criteria depends its publication. Once the concept is received, it is sent to the author to take into account the observations of the evaluation, in cases of divergence between the evaluators, or before the author’s observations, an evaluator may be assigned in the opinion of the Committee to decide the evaluation.
The evaluation criteria in each of the steps are the following:

    1°: Review first filter

The first filter is made by the internal committee of the journal and seeks to evaluate whether the article meets the minimum requirements of structure and academic quality suggested in the submission section.

Evaluation format first filter: Download

Note: If the article is suitable with modifications it will be returned to the author to make the relevant changes and forwarded to the journal.

Once the article is approved in the first filter, the author(s) must sign a submission letter.

    2°: double-blind evaluation

Once the article is approved by the editorial committee, two referees are assigned to it. Each article is reviewed by at least two evaluators through a double-blind process. The referees evaluate the manuscript based on originality, quality of argumentation, novelty of the thesis, rigour of analysis and handling of original sources, as well as the topicality of the bibliography.

Some of the selection criteria for arbitrators are as follows:

a. The evaluator must have an academic degree equal to or higher than that of the author.
b. The evaluator must have graduate studies.
c. He or she must be a specialist in the subject dealt with in the article to be reviewed.
d. It should be clear if he or she has any conflict of interest when conducting the review.

Finally, the evaluation times are: 1 week to respond to the review request and 3 weeks to review the article.

    3°: editorial decision

Based on the concepts issued by the reviewers, the editor makes the decision on the acceptance of the article, being able to choose between the following options:
a. Publishable
b. Publishable with minor modifications
c. Forward for review (where major structural modifications are required). It is hoped that the reviewer can make a second evaluation of the new version sent by the authors.
d. Not publishable.

    4°: publication

Once the article finishes its review process, style correction and diagramming are performed, culminating with publication in the journal under the terms of copyright.